“Fear of failure and lack of guidance keep those who need it most from accessing recognition of prior learning,” writes Patrick Werquin, professor at the French higher education institution CNAM, in his column. He has worked in education and the labour market across Africa, Europe and Southeast Asia.
Recognition of prior learning (RPL) still fails to effectively reach and engage the individuals who are most in need of qualification – an official document attesting to knowledge, skills and competences.
Although RPL has reached the top of the policy agenda in most countries worldwide, participation remains biased toward individuals who may not be the primary equity target. Those at the bottom of the qualification distribution, that is, individuals without qualifications or with credentials that carry little value in the labour market or society, are largely unreached by RPL across the world. This creates a risk of highly educated people benefiting more from the adult learning system. In the case of RPL, those who already have credentials are also more likely to gain additional ones.
Recognition of prior learning is designed to award the qualification to individuals who can demonstrate the corresponding learning outcomes, regardless of where, when and how they were acquired. RPL is a key policy tool for creating a virtuous circle from learning to qualification, decent work and social protection.
RPL is a key policy tool for creating a virtuous circle from learning to qualification, decent work and social protection.
From an equity perspective, the primary target group for RPL policies is people who have the knowledge, skills and competences but lack a formal document to substantiate them and therefore suffer the most in the labour market. This is the reasoning or justification that most countries across the world use when they start or establish a system for RPL. A qualification is a key component of employability, and labour market recruiters use it to select workers.
From an efficiency point of view, RPL is also a welcome policy because there are many talents among those who could not go to school at all or long enough to achieve a qualification in the initial education and training system, and this is a loss for the countries.
THE EVIDENCE IS CONSISTENT. It comes from all RPL practitioners and professionals from many countries around the world, and from statistical surveys: RPL barely reaches the layer of individuals below the layer of those who have the lowest qualification in their national qualifications framework, the first vocational level. The reasons are multiple, found everywhere but varying in extent by country. They often accumulate to leave out the needy, which makes policy responses complex.
Around the globe, poor access to appropriate information, advice and guidance is the primary barrier preventing universal access. RPL is a relatively new approach and individuals with no qualification, and a poor education track record, do not have access to information and guidance about what RPL is about, nor about RPL opportunities in practice. The staff at the RPL front office may also overinterpret eligibility conditions for access to RPL and demand too much in terms of credentials and education background.
The importance of entry points into the RPL system is systemically underestimated by RPL designers, and so is an effective communication policy all together. This is critical because applicants who are badly informed at this first stage are lost forever.
The entry points into the RPL system are critical because applicants who are badly informed at this first stage are lost forever.
Even when information is available, many potential applicants self-exclude themselves at the entry stage because of the fear of failure. This is mainly a lack of self-confidence. Individuals with no qualification do not believe they are legitimate RPL applicants, and they give up easily, especially when front office staff lack the proper approach in talking to them. They think they do not have reasonable chances of success in the RPL assessment. “RPL is not for me” is among the most frequently heard comment from this group. There is particularly strong evidence of this in Africa, Latin America and Haiti.
There are also cases where RPL applicants engage in the process, follow it through but give up just before the final evaluative interview. Pilots in Morocco witnessed a lot of dropouts just before the final interview among those who had followed the entire RPL process. People with an already high level of qualification enrol more often in RPL, because they are used to assessment and know how to handle this part of the process, which is considered stressful.
In addition, workers all over the world in low-level jobs fear they would become illegitimate in their work if they failed. They also give up and become trapped in low-level jobs. Overall, fear of failure is a barrier both for entry into RPL and, for some, for completion at the final assessment stage.
The lack of replacement income also prevents participation in RPL, especially in low-income countries such as in Africa, Southeast Asia, Latin America or Haiti. Participants may drop out of the process when they can no longer support their families while preparing their RPL portfolios and attending guidance sessions. If RPL is not treated as training organised during working hours and/or subsidised, it is not user-friendly for those who are at the bottom of the income distribution, who are also those at the bottom of the qualification distribution. This leads to the low-level jobs trap. Especially in Africa, employers tend to use the argument of a lack of qualification to keep workers in non-decent jobs.
IN THE END, THERE ARE many solutions to the situation. However, overly general solutions do not bridge the equity gap because they mainly increase the uptake among those who are not the neediest. Credible solutions must be focused on inviting the neediest by
- allowing the use of a smart portfolio of competences (e.g., using sound, pictures, video from a smartphone without requiring high-level digital literacy skills)
- allowing the use of scribes to help with language without intervening in the content
- explaining to potential applicants who fear assessment that RPL is not about a teacher talking to a pupil but about a professional talking to a professional
- making replacement earnings possible, and
- offering appropriate information and guidance.
The situation is not hopeless, as more and more solutions are emerging to reach those most in need, but this takes time. In the field of RPL, a large gap will likely remain between those who actually use RPL and those who should use it because they have substantial skills and competences but no formal qualifications.
Patrick Werquin, PhD, is a professor at the French research lab ‘Centre de recherche sur le travail et le développement’, which is part of the pedagogical unit ‘Institut national d’étude du travail et d’orientation professionnelle’ (Inetop) at the higher education institute CNAM, Conservatoire national des arts et métiers. He has over 40 years of experience in the fields of education, training and the labour market.
Werquin also works as an independent consultant. He has worked, among others, for the French and Belgian development agencies, the Institute for International Cooperation of the German Adult Education Association (DVV-International), the European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD), the European Commission and ministries in various countries.
Werquin has also been working and publishing on education and training policies, monitoring and evaluation, technical and vocational education and training, national qualifications systems and frameworks, recognition of prior learning, individual learning account and statistical indicators and econometric analysis of education system and the labour market.
He has professional experience in all OECD countries as well as in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Arab world and Southeast Asia.
